Okay, as some people here insist on comparing science and religion on ethical matters...

[DetlefK]

I don't like that game, but if you want to play, let's f**king play.





What is the worst thing that a religious person has ever done to a scientific-minded person in the name of religion?
What is the worst thing that a scientific-minded person has ever done to a religious person in the name of science?

How many people oppressed and imprisoned, how many killed, how many lives ruined?

I'm sick and tired of threads in this sub-forum that desperately try to make an argument that science and religion are somehow equal.
They are not.
They are different in their philosophical foundations.
They are different in their methods for determining what is truth.
They are different in their treatment of empiricism.
They are different in that one defines a set of ethics and one doesn't.

They are radically different and they cannot coexist in a person without a mental disconnect.

[Major Nikon]

1. I don't want to detract from your valid point

...other than to say both religion and science define a set of ethics. The difference is one has "faith" their ethics are a fax from god while the other uses reason and empirical methods. The differences become even more apparent when one considers the former doesn't preclude things like child rape, slavery, and genocide while the latter is a bit more hard nosed about such things.

[uriel1972]

2. I disagree a bit...

What science does reveal more accuratley is the consequences of actions on other people and the environment. Each person's sense of right and wrong then takes over.

Hmmm, on the other hand, science requires consistency, openess and honesty to operate at full capacity. By making these a basic requirement you could argue that it makes people better.

I leave the apologetics and mental gymnastics required to okay mass slaughter and child rape at the command of your diety to others. I'm looking at you Bible... Yes, you!

[Major Nikon]

3. I'm speaking more to the science of ethics

Not to be confused with the ethics of science.

It’s more philosophical and less of a hard science, but still relies on reason and empirical testing.

[MineralMan]

4. I think that, one way or another, ethics and behavior

are a personal thing, religion or no religion. I've never really detected a difference in how people behaved, based only on whether they follow a religion or not, nor based on their type of work.

There are wonderful people who are devout religion followers, and the same for non-religious people working in almost every profession. By the same token, there are horrible people in both, as well.

I'm not sure that religious belief or the lack of it has much to do with whether a person is good or bad in their actions with others.

I've never been to correlate those things, anyhow.

[Cartoonist]

5. A timely image

My closed mind tells me not to read this book.

[guillaumeb]

6. The atomic bomb.

Weaponized anthrax.
Cluster bombs.
I could list more, but scientists invented these things. Science without ethics can be a very negative thing.

[DetlefK]

7. Were they used in the name of science or in the name of politics?

And that's not what I asked. I asked how scientists treat believers and how believers treat scientists.

[guillaumeb]

8. So science and scientists are unconcerned with ethics? eom

[DetlefK]

9. Every scientist has to face that their invention can be used for evil.

That new alloy you invented, that can be used for better armor.

That better tool you invented, that can be used for manufacturing weapons.

That medicine you invented, that can be used for keeping soldiers in the fight.

That harmless energy-source you invented, that can be used to power machines of war.

That weird nanomaterial you discovered, that can be used to build better electronics that can steer even deadlier machines of war.

That weird math you discovered, that could be used to solve a mathematical problem that eventually makes it possible to program artificial-intelligent killer-robots.

2017 scientists invented a device that can suck drinking-water out of almost-dry air. That can be used to supply military commandos behind enemy-lines.




In fact, when I studied physics, ethics in science was one of the first talks given to us in the first semester. The takeaway was that you cannot prevent abuse but that you have to do your best to prevent it anyways.

As for myself, one of my recent projects was about developing something that could very easily have been used for evil. It turned out to be a total failure.
Professionally, that's bad for my career.
But ethically I am secretly a little bit relieved that we failed.

[guillaumeb]

12. Thank you for the response.

[Major Nikon]

11. No

[Major Nikon]

10. The absence of ethics is problematic for all sorts of things

Organized religion is high on the list